Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.
It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^QuoteWedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.
Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.
Doesn't opening double Silver give you about a 60% chance of hitting $5 as well? So it double Silver too strong?It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^QuoteWedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.
Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.
It depends on whether the top-decked Silver substitutes an Estate or a Copper (you open with Wedding, topdeck a Silver and thus have 6 cards in your deck). In the former case you get 5$ and in the latter case 4$. Chances for the latter are slightly higher, 60%.
What does the third move have to do with this? Wedding changes the SECOND move if you open with 4. With Wedding a 4-3 changes into a 4-4 or 4-5 opening.Doesn't opening double Silver give you about a 60% chance of hitting $5 as well? So it double Silver too strong?It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^QuoteWedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.
Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.
It depends on whether the top-decked Silver substitutes an Estate or a Copper (you open with Wedding, topdeck a Silver and thus have 6 cards in your deck). In the former case you get 5$ and in the latter case 4$. Chances for the latter are slightly higher, 60%.
Except now you have a Wedding and a Silver in your deck. A Silver is nice, sure, but Wedding looks a little weak. On a Baker board, you could've just opened Silver/Five cost and skipped the weak Wedding. And no one thinks Baker openings are too overpowered.What does the third move have to do with this? Wedding changes the SECOND move if you open with 4. With Wedding a 4-3 changes into a 4-4 or 4-5 opening.Doesn't opening double Silver give you about a 60% chance of hitting $5 as well? So it double Silver too strong?It may indeed well be 4$ and indeed well be 5$. Which is precisely what I said. ^^QuoteWedding is too strong. If you open with 4 Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.
Not true, with a CCCCE open and a Wedding buy, my next hand may well be SCCEE for $4, not $5.
It depends on whether the top-decked Silver substitutes an Estate or a Copper (you open with Wedding, topdeck a Silver and thus have 6 cards in your deck). In the former case you get 5$ and in the latter case 4$. Chances for the latter are slightly higher, 60%.
I do not think that this is game breaking or anything but changing the symmetry of the opening (normally it doesn't matter whether you open with 3-4 or 4-3 with Doctor being the only exception that comes to mind right now) opening it is a significant change and probably makes Wedding an autobuy if you open with 4 in a lot of decks.
Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4$ Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.*ahem* Nomad Camp.
The on-gain effect of Nomad Camp is priced into the card, it is a more expensive Woodcutter. So let's compare buying a Nomad Camp and a Wedding on turn 1 if you have 4 coins:Wedding is too strong. If you open with 4$ Wedding is an auto-buy as you increase the coins for you second turn to 4 or 5.*ahem* Nomad Camp.
I just thought of a simple reason that Holy Order cannot gain Silvers at all when you gain one, let alone on top of your deck: If it gained silvers on-gain, it would be a strictly better buy than Silver at $4, which is a Dominion no-no.Okay, yeah, that's a great point. I'm gonna have to reconsider the nature of the on-gain bonus for buying it. Considering a margrave-like function, either put one or put two Treasures from in play on top of your deck.
The best it can possibly be is +3 cards on your next turn. Looks at Haunted Woods. That gives you the same thing plus it attacks your opponents. And this will rarely actually be +3 cards, normally it will be +2 cards, or worse. Wharf gives you that plus a buy, and 2 cards and a buy when you play it.Also good points, referring to version 1.0, but mostly accurate for the update as well. I knew I over-nerfed it, and it'll need something useful in the turn you play it: thinking either a draw-up-to-6 (thematic with the Duration effect) or a handsize attack on opponents (ensuring there's always a handsize attack in kingdoms with this, and making the Duration effect more valuable).
The new Pardon and Missal are pretty creative ideas and Pardon looks solid! Missal could easily cost $2 or even less, I think. Also I don't see the need for the top part to be a reaction. It could just say "+1 Action. Trash this. If you do, +2 Cards."True, and I almost wrote anticipating this when I posted it. Missal as printed differs from that in two ways. (1) Downside: it's dead without another action in hand; (2) upside: if you draw it from resolving an actions (say, Smithy) you can still trash this to buff it without another action. I leave it up to debate whether these are interesting enough differences, though I think the latter could be.
The best it can possibly be is +3 cards on your next turn. Looks at Haunted Woods. That gives you the same thing plus it attacks your opponents. And this will rarely actually be +3 cards, normally it will be +2 cards, or worse. Wharf gives you that plus a buy, and 2 cards and a buy when you play it.Also good points, referring to version 1.0, but mostly accurate for the update as well. I knew I over-nerfed it, and it'll need something useful in the turn you play it: thinking either a draw-up-to-6 (thematic with the Duration effect) or a handsize attack on opponents (ensuring there's always a handsize attack in kingdoms with this, and making the Duration effect more valuable).
I think you could fix 1 by not putting the effect on a Village and 2 by making it so that only the Funerals you trashed give you a bonus (probably requires mats or tokens). Either 1 or 2 should be fixed I think, not necessarily both.I'll consider changing part 1. I'll have to think about what it would be instead.
Indulgence: The Curse interaction (and the fact that it's doing nothing but that) is problematic: Either this is strong enough to make you want to buy Curses, in which case it completely nullifies any cursing attacks, or it is not, in which case it will be a complete dud in games without cursers. Both these things are not desirable.I doubt it would ever be strong enough to render Cursers moot. But whether it would be worthwhile to go after an intentional Indulgence-Curse strategy to a large extent I won't know til I can sit and test this one out a few times. But it might make sense to extend it to Hexes as well. (And Re: Gubump: Note also Excommunication is a Hex. There are still more Hexes, I just haven't posted all the cards as of yet).
Somewhat whacky idea for Black Mass: Instead of discarding the Curse, pass it to the player to the left.Some sort of passing mechanic incorporated into this might be interesting. I need to ruminate on it and what that might entail.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/Dominion%20cards/synod.jpg)2 actions would make it worse and more expensive than Farming village.
This is potentially interesting. Or at least different enough from existing cards to be worth doing. It's sort of like Wandering Minstrel, but different enough. I'm guessing it's too strong for $5. I would, at minimum, reduce it to +2 Actions.
2 actions would make it worse and more expensive than Farming village.
I disagree about Treasure cards. By the time you are wealthy enough to buy Synod to get good Action cards, you have good Treasures in your deck.2 actions would make it worse and more expensive than Farming village.
No. Farming Village is literally just Village. Synod discards all junk cards, including Treasures (which is what the majority of your junk cards are anyway), and can easily draw more than one card.
I disagree about Treasure cards. By the time you are wealthy enough to buy Synod to get good Action cards, you have good Treasures in your deck.
2 actions would make it worse and more expensive than Farming village.I see what you're saying, but it's not strictly worse than it. It's not strictly worse to draw only an Action instead of either an Action or a Treasure. There it's just different, not worse. It's more like Wandering Minstrel and Farming Village had a sweet sweet baby. I'd argue it is almost strictly better than Wandering Minstrel, since it's basically a sifting village for Actions, but this one actually puts it in hand if you find it.
I liked the previous Curse for Gold thing. Why remove it? As such, the card is plain useless. If you have a nice benefit for discarding a Curse, you don't need the part in italics.
Edit: I realize I accidentally deleted the main effect from the Black Mass mock up. It should indicate that if you discard a curse, gain a Gold.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/shrine.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/shrine.jpg.html)
A one-shot Throne-Roomed Band of Misfits acting as the same action card both times.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/holy%20vestment_1.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/holy%20vestment_1.jpg.html)
A sort of counterpart to Coin of the Realm. Can be called at the start of your turn to draw cards. The number of cards drawn depends on the number of Holy Vestments on the Tavern mat. You need 2 for it to be effective at all, and most of the time you won't want to start using it until you've got 3 or 4.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/sacrament.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/sacrament.jpg.html)
A simple discard for $ card. If the card drawn from it is a "dead" Action, no matter!
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/Penance.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/Penance.jpg.html)
Another Hex. A fairly low-risk negative VP, so long as you don't have too many colliding terminals or buy it too late. As soon as you can play it, you can trash it for VP.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/crusade_v2.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/crusade_v2.jpg.html)
A Smithy that gives you some value for drawing a dead VP card. Original version had +1 VP per differently named VP, but I think that was a bit much. Not sure that it's powerful enough to warrant the on-gain qualification; I'll probably scrap that.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/collection%20plate.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/collection%20plate.jpg.html)(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/charity.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/charity.jpg.html)
Collection Plate seeks out and duplicates a decent treasure card, leaving it on top of your deck. Gaining a Charity Plate gives opponents a Charity, essentially an unstackable Silver than can be exchanged for a better Treasure down the road.
(http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r150/GeneralRamos/templar.jpg) (http://s143.photobucket.com/user/GeneralRamos/media/templar.jpg.html)
I ran a test game with Templar earlier. The top half is probably a bit weak, and maybe should be +1 Action, +4 Cards. You only get to use it once every other shuffle, after all. The Attack's strength depends somewhat on the other player's deck cycle and what stage they're at. It's a good way to slow down a player deep into Greening. This can sometimes lead to a pinned hand, but not without remedy. I also had Holy See in the kingdom, and that proved a formidable counterpoint to Templar, putting a bunch of Golds and Silvers back into the mix.
I think you left out the "Hex" typing at the bottom of Penance.
Also a major problem with Shrine: If Fortress is in the Supply, Shrine can play it an infinite number of times, as you play it twice, trash it, put it back into your hand because of Fortress' on-trash effect, ad infinitum. Normally I ignore broken combos like that, but omnipotent combos are an exception (now, normally, it's pointless playing it more after you've drawn your deck, but if you used Training and/or Seaway and/or have a Diadem in your deck, it's an omnipotent combo and means you've won, really easily. Especially with that last one, since you'd be the only one able to accomplish it).
Also, Templar. It's a double-lab for $5, with the drawback that it gets discarded after you shuffle, which might be balanced, since you'd only get to play it every other cycle. The problem with it is, it can't really be an Attack because the attack doesn't trigger on-play, it triggers when you call it. Also, it's confusing when you shuffle and then attack in the middle of someone else's turn because of a card like Spy or something. Other than that, it's fine. I certainly wouldn't buff it to +4 Cards and an Action.
P.S.: +Cards comes BEFORE +Actions, not after it. You made that mistake on your Traveller Nun, as well.
Note that when Band of Misfits is discarded or trashed from play, doing so activates the when-discarded or when-trashed abilities of the card it was imitating, even though once you discard or trash it the card is back to being a Band of Misfits again.
I think you left out the "Hex" typing at the bottom of Penance.
Also a major problem with Shrine: If Fortress is in the Supply, Shrine can play it an infinite number of times, as you play it twice, trash it, put it back into your hand because of Fortress' on-trash effect, ad infinitum. Normally I ignore broken combos like that, but omnipotent combos are an exception (now, normally, it's pointless playing it more after you've drawn your deck, but if you used Training and/or Seaway and/or have a Diadem in your deck, it's an omnipotent combo and means you've won, really easily. Especially with that last one, since you'd be the only one able to accomplish it).
Also, Templar. It's a double-lab for $5, with the drawback that it gets discarded after you shuffle, which might be balanced, since you'd only get to play it every other cycle. The problem with it is, it can't really be an Attack because the attack doesn't trigger on-play, it triggers when you call it. Also, it's confusing when you shuffle and then attack in the middle of someone else's turn because of a card like Spy or something. Other than that, it's fine. I certainly wouldn't buff it to +4 Cards and an Action.
P.S.: +Cards comes BEFORE +Actions, not after it. You made that mistake on your Traveller Nun, as well.
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. Good eye on the missing Hex and misordered +Cards/+Action. I'll fix that.
The intention of "until you trash it" was to mean that up to the minute you trash it, but not when you trash it, it is that card. But looking back to the BoM FAQ this does seem to be a problem.QuoteNote that when Band of Misfits is discarded or trashed from play, doing so activates the when-discarded or when-trashed abilities of the card it was imitating, even though once you discard or trash it the card is back to being a Band of Misfits again.
So I welcome phrasing ideas to get the proper effect.
I'll mull over the thoughts on Templar. The Shuffle-Attack thing does require some addressing.
Templar needs to say "each other player reveals all cards in their discard pile and shuffles..." lest there's no way for other players to trace how many Victory cards there are in other players' discard piles. Even without that phrase, this card is going to be very slow (thus annoying) to resolve.
Similarly, Sacrament needs to say "Reveal and discard any number of cards from your hand" because otherwise you could discard multiple cards at once without other players being able to see each one individually. At least I think that's how it would work.
Crusade looks really weak; a Scout without the +1 Action. I'd usually rather just have a Duchy.You misunderstand it. It puts all three cards in your hand, not just the victory cards.
I don't really like the idea of a curse that's completely untrashable (Excommunication). I'd rather just make it harder to trash. Maybe "When you trash this, gain a curse" so you'd basically have to trash it twice.
How does Templar ever come off your reserve mat? If you intend for it to be a one-shot, wouldn't it be easier just to have it trash itself?When your shuffle your deck. So not a one-shot. It only gets played once every other shuffle. But of course, an opponent with Templar ramps up the frequency of shuffling.
Your Clergy line really ought to go something along the lines of Deacon-Priest-Monsignor-Bishop-Archbishop. You don't want to have up to 5 Popes floating around, and Cardinal is a different kind of status than Bishop. (Not all Cardinals are Archbishops or even Bishops, and in the Middle Ages, some of them were even laymen.) (Plus, not all Europeans in the Dominion era were Catholic; some were Orthodox and had neither Cardinals nor a Pope).The existence of Bishop hinders any attempt to make a stepwise or complete hierarchy of church offices. You'll note as well I've got "village priest" as such mostly as a reflection of the village-like nature of its turn two. I don't really care that there might be multiple popes floating around simultaneously (nor is it historically unprecedented). So in all, point taken, but not implemented.
Novice seems like an expensive version of Sage. It might be worth $3; definitely not $5, even given the arbitrariness of Traveller pricing.Well, the arbitrariness of Traveller pricing makes it a moot point, more or less. But it's better compared to Golem than Sage. It is not concerned with price of cards, and only hits Actions.
Nun can probably just set aside the Victory cards, like Island; it would make the card less wordy. Also, I think your 'Non-kingdom' wording is trying to account for variable-VP cards like Silk Road; setting them aside would avoid this problem, and also the problem of 'Non-Kingdom', which is not a Dominion term.This wording was suggested in the other thread on this Traveller line. Yes, setting aside a card could handle the other types of VP and it was suggested. I'll consider it further.
Sinner is missing some wording in the posted image. What is it supposed to say?It's all there, actually. Changing the name to Blasphemer caused too much squeeze on the bottom line, so I needed to move the in to before the ellipses instead on before hand and play respectively. If you have a Confession in play, you may exchange Sinner for Novice; if you have Confession in hand, you may exchange Sinner for Blasphemer. If you have one in play and one in hand, you may choose which way to exchange (but still only one way or the other, as indicated by "exchange").
Cloister seems overpriced; it's similar to Distant Lands but more expensive and less versatile, unless you plan to use a TFB on it.You might have misread this. Unlike Distant lands, this is not a risky investment. It's the opposite. You get the points when you buy it, and they're (mostly) untouchable. Cloister itself is fairly easy to get rid of thereafter, especially incentivizing buying more cloisters. Cloister is strictly better than Duchy, and not overpriced.
The idea of Excommunication, an untrashable curse, is OK, but the name is odd, thematically. Excommunications can be and frequently are lifted, and are not the result of blackmail. Also, thematically, you ought to get an Excommunication for playing a Heretic or Blasphemer.Sure, but theme's not everything. I mean, Giant and Torturer are both cursers connected to a witch-themed card. I mostly just wanted another card using Excommunication connected to Heretic. But I would certainly consider changing Excommunication's name. It started elsewhere from where it went in development, the name largely a vestige.
I like this as well, except that I fear the effect would just render this a simple curse in games with another curser, once the Curse pile is depleted. It might warrant this change nonetheless if I bumped the VP penalty to -2 on this card.I don't really like the idea of a curse that's completely untrashable (Excommunication). I'd rather just make it harder to trash. Maybe "When you trash this, gain a curse" so you'd basically have to trash it twice.I really like your idea.
Crusade looks really weak; a Scout without the +1 Action. I'd usually rather just have a Duchy.Yeah, you did misread that. It's a Smithy that sometimes gives you VP. And I think I will remove the on-buy effect of this.
Holy See looks worth testing, at least (though probably something Diocese would be a better name, as there is only one Holy See); you'll want to see how often people buy this over Duchy.From the few tests I've played with it, it served especially as a counterpoint to Templar and as a good buy later in the game near the shuffle point to push for major greening to the finish.
Labyrinth is interesting; my instinct is to compare it with Tunnel and Island, other Alt-VP cards that are too weak to be strategies on their own, but are sometimes worth buying for their abilities. However, I'm not sure I'd buy a Labyrinth for its ability, if it will trigger someone else's Labyrinth. Maybe have it trigger on gaining Provinces, or on gaining Treasures?Good point. I think I could just use the wording "Victory card other than Labyrinth."
Iconoclast seems way too powerful; it's a combination of a slightly-weaker Monument and a slightly-weaker Sea Hag.It seemed to pass muster after revision when it was posted some time ago. Cursing with it turned out in reality to be quite difficult to effect, unless a player was willfully ignoring the +VP token gainers on the table in favor of a different strategy.
Cursed Idol seems pretty weak; in order to use it, I have to buy what is effectively a Copper, costing myself a VP in the process, and then buy junk cards in order to curse other people.Yeah, I've been trying and trying to retool this card in a way that toned down its ridiculous ability to dole out curses en masse in previous iterations. I'm not sure it's worth retooling again. I can track down the link for the other thread if you want to review the discussion.
Collection Plate is similar to Explorer; how often do you buy one of those?Depends on your deck composition. Explorer can't get you alt-Treasures either. Nor does it have the deck-cycling effect. It's also cheaper.
Collection Plate seems weak, especially since a single Charity isn't really bad.I welcome suggestions on weakening Charity.
Penance is similar to Distant Lands, which costs $5; is it too cheap?
You nerfed Penance a little too much from it's previous version. Now it's just a Moat that gives you 2VP when you trash it instead of moat's reaction.Two very different views on Penance pricing. I think it's in some ways a riskier investment than Distant Lands, since it gives you negative points if you fail. You essentially go into debt first. You also can't get rid of it if there's a Curse or Hex in hand, which, given the terminal draw of this card, is another potential impediment to the reward after the early game. I think LibraryAdventurer is right that if anything, I nerfed it too much. But +3 cards might be too strong. I welcome suggestions.
Templar is going to be a big pain to resolve with the "Look through each others players' discard piles" part. It'd be simpler to say, "Each other player reveals their discard pile and shuffles up to five victory cards from it into their deck." Even that is going to cause too much reshuffling, and I don't think the attack needs to be up to five. I would do something like this: "Each other player reveals their discard pile and puts two (or 3) non-action victory cards from it on top of their deck."I'll think about it. Top-decking definitely speeds things up a bit, but it's a much harsher attack. Then again, Templar is player only once every other turn....
I use a card almost the same as Synod, except it says "reveal the top 2" instead of 3, and it's still plenty strong for a $4 cost. So I think Synod might be too strong for $4 & too weak for $5 as is.I originally priced it at $5, but with +3 Actions. But as posted here, I think it is comparable to Wandering Minstrel and is not necessarily strictly stronger or weaker than it. WM draws you a card no matter what, while Synod sometimes fails. WM sets up subsequent draws to grab Actions, but Synod discards all but the one you choose to put in hand.
Does Holy Vestment count itself when counting holy vestments on the tavern mat? hard to tell.No, you first call HV and then your count the VMs on the mat. So you need at least two to make the card useful.
I think Pardon is too similar to Shanty Town to be worth using. Also, I think Missal is too similar to Expedition.Similar. But I think they are sufficiently distinct to make their existence worthwhile. Shanty Town and Pardon play differently; and Missal is a bit more versatile than Expedition.
I like this as well, except that I fear the effect would just render this a simple curse in games with another curser, once the Curse pile is depleted. It might warrant this change nonetheless if I bumped the VP penalty to -2 on this card.I don't really like the idea of a curse that's completely untrashable (Excommunication). I'd rather just make it harder to trash. Maybe "When you trash this, gain a curse" so you'd basically have to trash it twice.I really like your idea.
Crusade looks really weak; a Scout without the +1 Action. I'd usually rather just have a Duchy.Yeah, you did misread that. It's a Smithy that sometimes gives you VP. And I think I will remove the on-buy effect of this.
Templar: As written, 'you may discard this' implies from your hand; it should specify 'discard this from your Tavern Mat' or 'from your hand or reserve mat' for clarity's sake.Noted, will add the wording to clarify!
Penance: I think I probably misread this card. But in any case, would it be better as something along the lines of 'Gain a Copper; if you do, + [3?] Cards'? This would make it a niche card like Beggar that has some useful combos. It would retain the self-penalizing aspect, and you could keep the on-trash bonus if you want.I like this. A lot. I think that can be implemented without it needing a line break, but if I can't I'll need to retool the wording overall to implement it.
Reliquary: Seems weak; maybe a little better than Trade Route, but it scales well with multiplayer and may be a decent counter to the likes of Cultist.This was built on comparison with Forager rather than Trade Route, actually. I initially wanted to make it dependent on differently named Action cards in the trash, but thought that could get crazy. Then I thought +$1 for every 2 differently named Actions in the trash, but then it gets a little hard to start up. So then I thought of attaching it to Ruins. I wonder if setting it to play off Actions more generally would be worth a revisit.
Black Mass: Superficially similar to Quest. Only problem is that it's completely useless in games without Cursing attacks. Maybe you could have it discard a Curse or Victory card costing $3 or more (so that it doesn't trash Estates or Overgrown Estate)? But I like the concept.I wouldn't say useless, though obviously its value is more marginal in games without cursers. In games where it is present, all players will start with 1 curse in their deck anyway. And if there's decent trashing and you have a spare buy, you might grab another curse to speed up the Gold gain. We'll see upon testing.
Indulgence: I think this would be weak even if its ability weren't a one-shot. Sure, in some games you'll want one of these for the cantrip +Buy, but it's only better than Market Square in games that have both Cursing and no Trashing. Maybe you could instead have it read, 'You may trash this and another card from your hand; if you do, +2 VP' for a similar but more versatile effect.As is, it's done pretty well in test games at netting some decent VP in kingdoms with and without cursing, especially when one player goes at it uncontested.
Iconographer I like it, but the text could be improved toThis turns it into a choice, though, which I didn't intend. If you play it and can't succeed in trashing two Treasures, I want you to have to trash it and gain a silver. As a choice, you can always just choose "Trash two Treasures" regardless of whether there are Treasures in hand to trash, and keep the +VP gainer.
+1 VP
Choose one: Trash two Treasures from your hand; or trash this and gain a silver
Holy Vestment If I have 3 Holy Vestments on my Tavern mat and decide to call all of them at the start of my turn, do I draw 6 or 9 cards? (If I have to resolve them sequentially, I get 3 from the 1st HV, 2 from the 2nd, 1 from the 3rd; if they resolve simultaneously, then they each draw 3 cards). I don't know of a good reading to distinguish the two possibilities.The once per turn is supposed to indicate that you may only call on Holy Vestment once per turn. Perhaps a wording shift from "you may call this" to "you may call a Holy Vestment" would clarify this (though the FAQ will anyway). So the math is unnecessary in that case. I have 6 HVs on the mat, at the start of my turn I call one, and draw 5 cards. I cannot call another HV.
Funeral: As a rule, Dominion cards either give +Coin or +Cards but not both at the same time. I think this card would be better off giving +Coin only; there are precedents for one-shot coin producers (Spoils, Death Cart, Pillage), but not one-shots that give +Cards, except for Madman, which is intentionally overpowered. (I suspect that this means that one-shot that gives +Cards has already been tested and found wanting). Also, you might want to have it cost $3, because Dark Ages introduced a division between 'good trash' that costs $3 or more, and 'Bad Trash' that costs $2 or less.Funeral has seen considerable reworking from the original post, so much of it in this form hasn't been extensively tested yet. The combination of +Card/+Coin for the most powered-up version was mostly out of a desire to do something other than straight card draw for that stage. I don't quite get your initial statement, though. This is effectively what City does at its most powered up. The pricing point is goo to note, though. But I'm not sure its non-one-shot utility is worth bumping it to $3, since--as noted above--the above-the-line text is strictly worse than Squire.
Collection Plate Wouldn't it be better to just deal out Coppers, because 1) a single Charity is not all that bad, as LA said, and 2) Charity seems to weak to use up a card slot, even if it's not in the Supply.Good point. I'll probably implement this.
Confession Donald X has already said that he's tried a discarding Lab for $4 and it didn't work (see the Secret History of Adventures, or the Fugitive page on the wiki)Yeah, this has been raised above (page 1?). However, this is not a supply card you can just buy, so the pricing on this is nominal only. The pricing issue doesn't necessarily work the same for it. You can only gain it by buying a Duchy, meaning each Confession is also adding a dead card to your deck.
Two Event ideas that came to me.
Excommunication [I've renamed the old Excommunication (see above) to Damnation, though still not settled on that]
Event - $3
+1 Buy
Put this card on an Action supply pile. While this is on a supply pile, card from that pile cannot be played.
Book of Magic
Event - $1
Move the Book of Magic token to your Tavern mat. While it is on your Tavern mat, you may play Curses during your Buy phase for $2 per Curse.
Your Copper comment doesn't make any sense. You didn't read the card properly; it is already limited to "Put this on an Action supply pile."Two Event ideas that came to me.
Excommunication [I've renamed the old Excommunication (see above) to Damnation, though still not settled on that]
Event - $3
+1 Buy
Put this card on an Action supply pile. While this is on a supply pile, card from that pile cannot be played.
Book of Magic
Event - $1
Move the Book of Magic token to your Tavern mat. While it is on your Tavern mat, you may play Curses during your Buy phase for $2 per Curse.
I don't like Excommunication. It's too much in-your-face and really crippling, especially with Villages, cantrips and Copper.
Copper is especially bad. If you go first, and have $5, you can buy Excommunication and Duchess, put the card on Copper and win by emptying the Estate, Duchess and Copper pile over years of agony. Also works with other openings and cards. You can fix the Copper thing by only putting it on kingdom or action cards, but honestly i think you'd be far better off with REWARDING yourself for other players playing a card. How about something like this:
Absolution, $3
Put your Absolution token on an action supply pile. When another player plays a card from that pile, take a coin token.
Another card idea that came to mind recently.This is a nice variation of Production Village. I'd test is with "if this is the first Monastery you played" as well as without that restriction.
(http://i.imgur.com/hkXa0sH.jpg)
Inspired by Contraband. Instead of declaring what card you cannot buy, however, another player names an Action card and voids its abilities. This doesn't hinder another player from playing it (e.g., for the sake of variety for HoP), but it is only played as a dead card. Unlike contraband, no more than one card can be named per turn, so it can still be played multiple times for more Actions as needed without the fear of impairing the utility of +Action. Ultimately, this card discourages a strategy centered around one or two Action cards.
Aside from the Contraband effect, the first one played on a turn is essentially a Lost City. The draw power of subsequent ones depends of course on what Action cards are played in conjunction. This should maybe cost $5.
Could you update the OP with the current versions of the cards? (or put them in a new post)I have updated the OP, with a few notes. I can provide high-res images for anyone who want to print them out, and the TS template for anyone who wants to play with these cards (without me). Just PM me
After our game, I plan to add several of them to my fan card collection to print and use IRL.
Could you update the OP with the current versions of the cards? (or put them in a new post)I have updated the OP, with a few notes. I can provide high-res images for anyone who want to print them out, and the TS template for anyone who wants to play with these cards (without me). Just PM me
After our game, I plan to add several of them to my fan card collection to print and use IRL.
Thanks. I did fix that but loaded an old image. I'll try to update it later.Could you update the OP with the current versions of the cards? (or put them in a new post)I have updated the OP, with a few notes. I can provide high-res images for anyone who want to print them out, and the TS template for anyone who wants to play with these cards (without me). Just PM me
After our game, I plan to add several of them to my fan card collection to print and use IRL.
Heretic and Blackmail still refer to Excommunication even though you renamed Excommunication to Damnation.
Charity costs nothing?
Charity costs nothing?
The cost was TBD. Seeing how long the thread has been dead, I doubt there will be one officially determined anytime soon.
Charity costs nothing?
The cost was TBD. Seeing how long the thread has been dead, I doubt there will be one officially determined anytime soon.
What does TBD mean? :)